ReutersThe government’s banning of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation has the hallmarks of an authoritarian “abuse of power”, the High Court has heard.
Lawyers for the group’s co-founder told a senior judge that the proscription of Palestine Action had made the UK an international outlier and placed legitimate protesters at risk of being criminalised if they speak out over the war in Gaza.
Huda Ammori is asking the High Court for permission to directly and swiftly challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s ban on the group.
The ban means that membership or support for Palestine Action is a crime under terrorism legislation that can lead to up to 14 years in jail.
More than 170 people have been arrested since the ban under the Terrorism Act of 2000 was introduced.
Palestine Action has engaged in activities that have predominantly targeted arms companies since the start of the current war in Gaza.
Cooper announced the ban, later approved by Parliament, after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and allegedly caused some £7 million of damage to two RAF planes, which the organisation said were used to provide support to the Israeli military.
A series of criminal prosecutions relating to incidents between 2022 and 2024 are currently before courts. Four people accused of the Brize Norton incident face trial more than a year from now.
Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, told Mr Justice Chamberlain on Monday that the home secretary’s ban was unlawful and she should be allowed to challenge it.
“The proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights,” he said.
“The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier. The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.”
Ms Ammori’s lawyers said the ban was having a “chilling effect” on legitimate protest.
Many of the people arrested since the ban had been holding signs reading: “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”.
The court was told that one man in Leeds had been detained under terrorism powers for holding up a copy of an item in the satirical magazine Private Eye which had lampooned the ban.
In another case, a 77-year-old woman from Keighley, West Yorkshire, was held over a placard that read: “I support NON-VIOLENT PALESTINE ACTION to oppose VIOLENCE AND GENOCIDE.”
Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, added: “Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest. Your task is to decide whether these are proportionate restrictions on free speech.”
The court heard that the government’s internal assessment of Palestine Action, drawn up by the secret Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre inside MI5, had concluded that the majority of its activity did not cross the legal threshold for a ban.
However, the UK’s legal definition of terrorism also encompasses the use of serious criminal damage to advance a cause.
Speaking to News ahead of the hearing, Cooper said the decision to proscribe the group was not aimed at restricting free speech.
“This is not about protesting or campaigning, be it about Palestine or about anything else,” she said.
“This is instead, just about a particular organisation where there have been a series of violent attacks against national security targets and also have involved injuries and intimidation to people as well.”
“That is very different from both protest and…the normal criminal law as well.”
Her lawyers told the court that Palestine Action had an alternative route to appeal a ban by going to a special court that would be set up just to deal with the case.
They added that if police had made mistakes in who had been arrested, that was not a reason to overturn the ban.
Mr Justice Chamberlain said that he will give his ruling on 30 July.
